Colin Cowherd Does Not Like How We Sensationalize His Views

Jake ODonnell 02:41 pm, December 16th, 2014

In case you missed it, on Monday, Colin Cowherd made the rather insightful point that Kobe Bryant doesn't have many signature moments in his career -- at least when compared to his fellow NBA greats. He said, and we're quoting, that Kobe's career is "a blur of jumpers," which is a harsh way to paint the guy's 17-year body of work.

We posted the clip of his rant yesterday, under the headline, "Colin Cowherd: Kobe's Career Just A Blur Of Jumpers." We then took the angle that it was a valid point which could be argued either way, cited a famous Kobe highlight, then wrapped the whole thing up by saying it's a fun, semantic sports debate. Ya know, like the kind EVERYONE IN SPORTS RADIO THRIVES OFF OF.

No harm, no foul, right? Wrong.

To Cowherd -- whose opinions I personally agree with 99 percent of the time -- this was the epitome of sensational journalism. He painted our Kobe post as the sports equivalent of screaming fire in a crowded movie theater because someone lit a match. Here's what he said about it today:

"SportsGrid had me up there. 'Kobe's career just a blur of jumpers says Cowherd.' At the end of the story they say well, it's a semantics of basketball argument. There is no right or wrong. It is fun to debate it. but the headline is, Cowherd is way out there! I find a lot of people that don't like trolls are trolls. A lot of people that don't like sensationalism are sensationalizing. There is not much to get worked up over in sports."

Ok, while that might be true to some degree, remember: We didn't go on live television and say that Kobe Bryant's career is "just a blur of jumpers" to an audience of millions. That's newsworthy to the legions of Lakers fans who deify Bryant, and an interesting point for the rest of the sports world to chew on for a infinitesimal moment. That's all.

Our post was a compliment that Cowherd took as a criticism. When you interview the President of the United States on Friday, that should tell you your words/opinions echo a bit louder than the average midday shock jock's. You become the news, whether you like it or not. Then factor in his own point that "not a whole lot happens in sports," and it becomes clear why we're publishing an article centered on the divisive musings of the most popular sports radio talk show host in a country of 310 million people.

Maybe next time we'll title our ripped soundbites: "King Of Media Colin Cowherd Says Crazy Thing That's Actually Kind Of Poignant When You Really Think About It But None Of This Matters Because It's Sports After All, Right?"

We do create news, Colin. We do troll you, Colin. That works for us. But if you're gonna give Joe Buck a pass for mocking Johnny Manziel during the broadcast of another football game, you've got to at least pretend to understand why sites like SportsGrid and Awful Announcing frame the things you say in slightly less measured manner than The New York Times might.

"[Joe Buck is just] a national broadcaster saying what everybody in a bar is thinking," Cowherd said in reference to the outrage over his Manziel jab during the Seahawks-49ers game.

Ya, and we're the ones whose job it is to let the other guys in the bar know that Joe Buck agrees with them. They like debating the merits and opinions of sports media personalities (like yourself) as much as they enjoy those semantic arguments about the players themselves. You know how this works, Colin. We've all got a role to play here, and we look forward to many more semantic arguments in the future.